Distorting the meaning of "peace" in Oslo...

As Trump was escalating his so-called "war against drug terrorists" off the coast of Venezuela, here in Britain, the public was offered the spectacle of the BBC's Lucy Hockings fawning over Nobel "Peace" prize winner, Maria Corina Machado, leader of the Venezuelan opposition.

    Machado may have arrived in Oslo too late for the start of the award ceremony, but her supporters were already there: right and far-right South American leaders attending in celebration of their acceptance into the mainstream of politics, led by Chainsaw Milei, the anti-working class President of Argentina (see the article in this journal) - and outspoken advocate of every conspiracy theory under the sun. By their friends shall ye know them...

    It's possible that the Nobel Peace Prize Committee may well have had a few doubts over their choice this year. Or maybe not. The president of the Committee did, however, hurry Ms Machado away from the Press Conference, after she had launched into a rather unhinged speech. Indeed, this "Peace" Prize winner told everyone proudly and loudly, how she supports Trump's escalating "war" against Venezuela and the attacks on what he has called "drug boats" without any evidence whatsoever - killing 87 people so far. She then went on to advocate even further escalation - implying that Trump's military should invade Venezuela outright, remove Maduro and impose regime change - so that she could take over - rightfully(!) - and everything could be lovely and democratic, since she "loves" democracy so much!

    She said such an outcome would be fully justified because Venezuela had already been "invaded" - by Hezbollah, Hamas, drug gangs, criminals and guerillas from Colombia... and of course Maduro himself is also a "criminal" as far as she is concerned. For sure, the Maduro regime has, like many of the poor countries of this world, opposed Israel's slaughter of the Palestinians... which Machado - the great peace lover - has fully supported.

...and in London

Anyway, so much for the establishment's idea of "peace". And that can be said too, of Keir Starmer and his hypocritical stance over Ukraine. His "Coalition of the Willing" which has been fuelling this war with a supply of weapons, without which it would never have been able to continue for these 4 long years, is now claiming that a "peace" agreement is being prevented by Putin...

    And then on 11 December, NATO chief Mark Rutte came out with that "warning" that NATO member states are "Russia's next target"! He claimed that Russia could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years and that NATO therefore needed to prevent a war that could be "on the scale of war our grandparents and great-grandparents endured". Whatever that may mean. In fact the irony of all of this is that it was Russia which has been NATO's target all along! For four years European countries and the US have been using Ukraine as a proxy to weaken Putin's resistance - because their real target is indeed the opening up of Russia and its resources to exploitation by their capitalist classes - and thus "regime change" would be needed in this case too... And when it comes to resources, the vast untapped minerals (and its oil, gold, rare-earths...) of this huge country are far more interesting than Ukraine or anywhere else within reach!

*****

Meanwhile, back at the Reeves ranch...

Back in Britain, the delayed budget was duly delivered by Rachel Reeves on 26 November - or what was left of it, after so much had leaked out!

    In fact the biggest "shock" was the accidental publishing of its contents by the Office of Budget Ir-Responsibility, before she had a chance to pull any rabbits out of her hat at the despatch box!

    But even without the OBR leak, there would not have been any rabbits. Predictably, the two-child benefit cap is now gone. Labour MPs waved their order papers in approval - since clapping isn't allowed in the House of Commons. But will this really lift nearly half a million families out of poverty?

    An extra £17.26 per week per child might just about keep the wolf from the door - and it might even help poor families keep the heating on a bit longer this winter. But it is not much of a lift, given the general rise in the cost of living: if your family food bill is £100 a week, it's already gone up by £25...

    In fact the budget - as always - was really aimed at the financial markets. And they were not bothered - hardly twitched, in fact, at any of the Chancellor's measures. Which kind of says it all.

    As for the big scandal made by Sky News and others (and not to forget, Nigel-Reform-Farage and the stand-up comedy of Kemi Badenoch) about "broken election manifesto promises" on tax rises, well, one has to wonder why they should care in the first place? Since when do they represent Labour's "disappointed" electorate?

    Then again, as far as the interests of the "working people" that Reeves and others keep referring to, yes indeed, it would certainly serve these interests best if public spending - funded by big tax rises on the rich - went up... Because, quite obviously, this is what pays for schools, the NHS, and all other public services, and they are habitually, whether under Labour or Tory governments, starved of funds in order to make concessions to the capitalist class, who all these politicians serve...

Adapting to Reform

Clearly what is worrying Starmer et al most, is the rise and rise of Nigel Farage's Reform. They are perturbed that Labour and its dear leader are trailing so far behind in the opinion polls, way below the populist Reform and even the Greens at the moment...

    So very predictably they are trying to turn around the party's polling fortunes by playing to Reform's antiimmigrant gallery.

    On 17 November, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood thus announced "the most sweeping asylum reforms in modern times". She used her own immigrant background to claim she was perfectly justified in doing so - indeed, on a "moral mission" to "fix the broken system and unite the divided country"...

    And surprise, surprise, she got the thumbs up from Tory leader Kemi Badenoch and from Danny Kruger, the ex-Tory who went over to Reform! Kruger said he was looking forward to accepting her application to Farage's party. Apparently the Islamophobic Tommy Robinson also approved.

    After she'd talked about a society torn apart by the refugee crisis she was criticised for making division in society worse by her language, so she feigned anger at her critic, saying, "I am the one who's called a 'f***ing Paki'". This produced the effect she'd hoped for: a reprimand from the Speaker of the House and expressions of sympathy from several members of the opposition for her "very shocking" experience...

They know they can't stop the boats

The policy which the Home Secretary unveiled is a bit more shocking. Its most striking aspect is the 20 years that asylum seekers would have to wait before applying for British citizenship - as opposed to the current 5 years. Just a few months ago the idea was to copy the Tories' 10-year proposal...

    This 20-year rule is meant to be the main migration deterrent - it's Mahmood's version of the Tories' Rwanda scheme. There'd be no automatic financial support for refugees and their temporary status would be reviewed every 30 months. The right to appeal against deportation would be reduced to one application. And deportations of all non-genuine refugees would be prompt.

    Does the government think that this will stop the boats and prevent refugees from paying smugglers lots of money? Of course it doesn't. It knows that the only way to stop the boats is to provide a safe alternative way for would-be migrants to come to Britain. More people died last year trying to cross the Channel in precarious dinghies - 74! - than in all previous years put together. This, above all, is why Mahmood's policy is inhuman and, frankly, racist.

    The politicians of every party echo Mahmood: they all say that borders need to be controlled. But while they admit the world has changed, they don't think borders need "changing"! Mahmood agreed with Labour backbenchers that "safe and legal routes" must be created, but only conceded that a few - maybe 100 - refugees would initially be allowed in this way. And only after "we restore order and control".

    It's quite remarkable that the one factual pro-migration argument is absent from the debate: that the "British" population is in serious decline. The chronic shortage of nurses, skilled trades, teachers, etc., has a biological reason: a fall in the birth rate - a crisis in most rich countries, which means that immigration is vital! Refugees are a natural solution to a problem plaguing all the "old" former colonial powers, in fact!

The new far right in Downing street

For now, however, it seems Mahmood's announcement has had the effect she wanted: appealing to potential Reform voters in the hope they'll vote Labour. She's responded directly to the small demonstrations organised by overt racists - Britain First, UKIP, Patriotic Alternative, Homeland etc., activists who deliberately conflate asylum-seeking and sexual/"criminal" offences as happened in the obviously contrived episode in Epping. Starmer has even defended the flag-raising epidemic - which is quite evidently aimed against "foreigners".

    But forget about the government exposing racism and xenophobia for what they are, or opposing them! If there's a divisive threat today, it's emanating directly from Labour's Starmer and his ministers, in fact!

    Isn't it a Labour council in Birmingham which has been holding out against the bin-workers' strike? Yes, a strike that's just been reinforced by the same agency temps who this anti-working class council had expected to scab against the strikers!

    And what about Health Secretary Wes Streeting's outburst against the doctors' strike? He portrays them as greedy villains when in fact they're fighting against utter exhaustion and overwork - and being stuck in posts paying even lower wages, because the NHS chooses not to create the necessary vacancies for them to complete specialist training.

    Streeting deliberately played the divisive card when he claimed that "struggling working families" would be looking at the doctors, thinking how well they're paid and wondering "how dare they strike" when NHS waiting lists are so long! When quite obviously, it's the government which is 100% to blame for the poor state of the NHS and for doctors' appalling working conditions/low pay (half of a train driver's, 25% less than a Ford car worker's)!

    So yes, who needs the far-right when you have Shabana Mahmood, Wes Streeting and Keir Starmer doing the "divide and rule" job for the capitalist class - using all tools in the box, to attack our class and the most vital part of it today: our brothers and sisters from overseas!